I don't see why people think it either has to be 100% commercial rip off company, or 100% hobbyists doing it for pure fun and living on thin air.

Surely there is a third way. Maybe a bounty system could be introducted. In your example people could donate to a bounty fund for implementing printer support. Developers implementing this would receive the bounty or share of.

I'd like to say two things, and then I'll be on my way, without a care as usual.

(1) I'm not paying $30 for something that should be free. I've yet to find another pay-for puplet (not that I'm trying hard) and I don't think there should be one, either. Kinda goes against the "freedom" stuff we have going on here

(2) If it's "elite" to pay money for something when you don't (and shouldn't) have to... then I don't want to be elite. I'm sorry, wasteful spending (and indeed wastefulness of any kind) is really a problem in this world.

EDIT: as an elaboration to the last sentence in point#2... in Western Civilization, we have diseases of too-much (some types of diabetes, obesity, etc.) whereas most of the rest of the world has diseases of not-enough (malnutrition and the like). This is not what I would consider an ideal or balanced way of doing things._________________

If you are happy to be judge and jury, defining in life what 'should' be,
then your definition of freedom is sorely lacking. I have watched
a plethora of forum sagas where windows and linux musicians alike
struggle mightily, wasting dozens if not hundreds of hours to achieve something a trivial purchase would have provided.

And those hours were not free, having been at cost to employers,
spouses, children, and friends, who lost out on interaction. Not
to mention the lack of productivity the individual incurred, and
also the medical stresses of mentally thrashing about, compared
to those who paid a few dollars, and simply sat down, and pressed the
record button.

Nothing is free, except the blindness to ignore the real price people pay.

I've been using Puppies for about 5 years. It my primary OS. I love it, and can not say how much I appreciate the hard work and generosity Barry K, the devs and testers put into it. Whenever I have the opportunity, I recommend Windoz users to try it, and have even given away CDs and USB-Keys to encourage them to do so.
That said, the first thing I did five years ago was plunk down $20+ for a wireless adapter because, at that time, Puppy's wireless capabilities were limited. I could have spend 10 or more hours trying to get Puppy to use the adapter I had. It would have been a waste of my time, and probably soured my view of Puppy.
If someone is willing to pay $20 for a wireless adapter in order to accomplish what he or she needs, why not $30 for an entire operating system? Especially for a 64-bit one?
If Announcer can make a couple of bucks for his hard work and effort, why not? Honestly, how many of his detractors have taken the opportunity to make a donation to Barry K, or to prit and runtt21 for their dedication and creativity?
Nothing is free. If it's "free to you" that only means someone else has paid the price in exchange, at best, for self-satisfaction in an accomplishment, or having contributed toward making the world a better place.
I wish Announcer success in his commercial efforts. The more people use his system, the more people are exposed to Puppy. Perhaps they'll "catch Puppy fever" and try one of the free versions. At which time Announcer will have to face a problem akin to the salesman trying to sell ice to Inuits. (See footnote),
The only valid objection to his efforts I can see is if he marketed an inferior product bearing the name "Puppy."

mikesLr

Footnote: I've used that phrase while there are those of us who can still appreciate it. There's a good chance our grandchildren won't understand it because we "freely" dump carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We don't pay for it, but those who come after us will.

The face of Linux is not Red Hat and SuSE (although those are popular with the Enterprise crowd who do, to be fair, seem to need a level of tech support above "free").

The face of Linux is the phrase "Linux is free software." That's not just what Linux is about, that's the essence of what makes it different from everything else. That's who we are, as Linux users, as well -- people who believe in real freedom. We're in it for everyone, not just ourselves. We care about this stuff.

If we change that, not only do we lose all of that, we become no better than Microsoft or Apple or the others like them -- and probably will descend into a similar madness of being interested more in profit than anything else.

That, to me, is the stuff of nightmares. Yes, paid tech support for free Linux is okay to me as long as the distinction is made that one is paying only for the support -- but that's where I draw my line and it's a firm one. Seems to me that anything stronger is unnecessary and could even be counterproductive (no paid support would be bad for the Enterprise market), but anything weaker... that could easily be a slippery-slope problem.

That's what this is about, to me. Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. I doubt it. Maybe I'm too late. Wouldn't surprise me (much).

Just... think before you buy, okay? You may not otherwise realize what you just bought... or sold._________________

Now lets see, if I want to duplicate Announcers' work, what would I have to do?

First I would have to learn how to compile a real-time kernel. How long would that take me to learn...weeks? Months? Even Jemimah said compiling a real-time kernel would be tough.
Next I would have to compile the specialty software that comes with Studio...that will take at least a few weeks more. Then I am sure there would be unforseen problems along the way that I would have to deal with.
Well there goes several months of my life...I would only undertake such a procedure if I really, really wanted to learn how to do it for knowlege's sake. But in all practicality, it would be much, much easier for me to just fork over 30 bucks. Yes, I can install Ubuntu Studio to a USB and make it portable, but it's not nearly as fast.

Bottom line: if you don't like it, don't buy it. But if others want to purchase it, then that's their decision.

It's too bad Lowtech burnt a few bridges on his way out. He does very good work. I've tried out one of his earlier versions and it was well done.

Having a few commercial Puppies out there will only serve to benefit the Puppy Linux community by putting it into the hands of people less inclined to join a community like this one and learn an extensive amount of techie stuff. Part of the business world is minimalism and resourcing. It makes a lot more sense for a business to pay for a product, and pay somebody to support it than to pay an employee to learn it from scratch.

I think having both commercial and open-source can only be positive for promoting Puppy. Any one of the fantastic developers here could market their support for a version of Puppy they developed, and still contribute to the projects that are here. Lowtech chose to sell a usb stick (with his development of Puppy included) but that is not the only model that could have been used.

Well, just saying, there's room for both, and it's too bad there are hard feelings about the situation.

Hello,
Tman.. +100
I dont think many of the 'detractors' here realize how much work goes into something like this..
P.A.W. took 7 months, and cost me a wife..
If I could have, IE had the skill, to market it and make a buck, I surely would have..
Deride all you want.. It is a fine product, and encompassed a lot of work..
Argue ethics all you want, but respect impeccable work when you see it..
I have every version, from the inception to 13.37, and use them a lot..
I cant compile an RT kernel successfully, Ive tried..
And most of the apps have to be compiled against the kernel..
Massive attention to detail..
Can we say "A little work"???

Hey Announcer/l0wt3ch, any chance of a devx and kernel sources, I would love to compile against this kernel...
Wireless drivers, ndiswrapper, etc...

RHEL is like a 10 figure business...

But beyond the chaos, this is a great distro..
Just sayin....._________________Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
http://puppylinuxstuff.meownplanet.net/puppyluvr/
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook
Puppy since 2.15CE...

Recognised my U-CONTROL UCA202 (as Slacko does ) so I can plug in my mixer and get jammin'

-

I have no problem with anyone attempting to market open source. Shuttleworth does it, Red Hat have been doing it for eons and they are a multi-million dollar business .. as have countless others tried for better or worse results.

Many users are of the opinion that if it isn't worth paying for it isn't worth having.

I have no problem with anyone attempting to market open source. Shuttleworth does it, Red Hat have been doing it for eons and they are a multi-million dollar business .. as have countless others tried for better or worse results.

Many users are of the opinion that if it isn't worth paying for it isn't worth having.

RHEL makes its money selling support and updates, security patches and user-specific customizations. NOT the software. The software AND all its sources are freely (after a free registration) available. That's why we have the RHEL-copy distros, CentOS and Scientific linux.
(Of course much more so, the same applies to Canonical/Ubuntu.)

RHEL does that not because they are "good" but because is illegal not too. If you are using GPL, GLP2 and even more so GPL3 material you are legally bound to "share alike".

So is perfectly legal to sell "Studio on the stick" for whatever price you see fit. (BTW $10 +$10 for the stick(?) is very reasonable. Save you the hassle and the trouble of doing it yourself).
However, not making freely available a GPL,2,3-based software and source, is illegal.
Actually if someone brings this to the attention of the FSF he/she may get in trouble...

Regarding the time that someone invests on a Pupplet/distro/software, just consider how much time has been invested in all the underlining software that is actually included for free, in the final "restricted product".
Few month or even years work of a single person is actually less than 1/1000 of the total (just consider than only the kernel is 20 years in development by hundreds of people).
To that extend many users have the option that should not pay one person for the free work of others.

If Studio was charging just for support and troubleshooting would be perfectly acceptable. Charging for the actual physical stick with the software is also perfectly acceptable, provided that the option of a free download is also available. But charging for the free code of (vastly) others?... Not so sure._________________Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too

It's a myth that Red Hat only sells their support, and not their software. For instance, if you click this link:

https://access.redhat.com/support/offerings/production/sla.html

You will see the first column is "self-support". That means you get ZERO support. And how much do they charge for Red Hat without support?

https://www.redhat.com/apps/store/desktop/

For a workstation, $179.

https://www.redhat.com/apps/store/server/

For a server, $349.

Studio 13.37 is a better "workstation" OS than Red Hat, and it only costs $30.

I find it interesting that not one person ever made a single GPL-related accusation when the Studio products were free. Only now that money has been invested in manufacturing, web hosting, and advertising, is this occurring.

As a matter of fact, any and all modified source code is hosted on the Internet and available to users. The GPL says you have to share the code with those you have distributed to, on request.

I'd suggest all the armchair critics and self-appointed GPL lawyers go and read it again, because there is obviously some confusion out there.

It's a myth that Red Hat only sells their support, and not their software.

Studio 13.37 is a better "workstation" OS than Red Hat, and it only costs $30.

Last time I needed help from someone more educated than myself,
it took 40 minutes, at $250 per hour. And no, she wasn't from Columbia,
so don't even go there

The fact that a vocal subset in the linux community go berserk at the
very site of a meager price tag, is not lost on mac and windoze users,
who write the whole lot of us off as a bunch of bearded, panty twisted loons,
eating walrus blubber and penguin, instead of steak and chicken.

Its good to see some sensible folks here, that acknowledge the value
of what linux developers have made possible, and the vast amount
of time and needless frustration, that is diverted into productivity

Have a great weekend,
wearing out the record button, keys, and strings

Hello,
I think it is funny that we do tend to get our "panties twisted" over something most are dead wrong about..
Ask Richard Stallman about GPL, GNU, Linux, and money....
Really Linux is GNU.. Linus developed a core.. Most of the software we are discussing is GNU (Gnu`s Not Unix) and was intended for sale...
Not to be confused with "leased" like Windoze...

Buy it, own it, do WTF you want with it.
That was the original idea...
But Linus threw a monkey wrench in Gnu`s plan.. So the argument is a moot point..._________________Close the Windows, and open your eyes, to a whole new world
http://puppylinuxstuff.meownplanet.net/puppyluvr/
Puppy Linux Users Group on Facebook
Puppy since 2.15CE...